I have no interest in debating the points or trying to compare new vs old MMOs. I enjoyed the older games. I believe they presented more of a challenge and were more rewarding for the successes you attained in them because of those challenges. You weren't hand held through everything so the community, besides being more mature to begin with, was formed through the games unforgiving world. This was true of UO, EQ, and DaoC (Realm Pride ftw) and to some extent AC.
So my only topic of interest in this is community.
The community has degraded over time because the access to these games has opened up so liberally to attract all age groups and mental states (for lack of a better word). So MMO's, like games in general have become easier and more user friendly. Elements that were seen to be too hard or over the top have been revamped over and over again, game after game which has ushered in the new age of MMO's. A new age who'se motto is one of no douchebag left behind.
I don't begrudge gaming companies this. They are out to make a profit and making a game appeal first and foremost to the lowest common denominator is a way to make money. The MMO market has expanded so remarkably in the last decade which I believe is due to far more than the aforementioned but that is a debate for another time.
I see this attitude to openness a mistake a reason that games flare up brightly these days and then wane out of existence but that is just my, rather unpopular opinion. Anyway, you will not see communities revert back to what they were until games do the same.
Which will, understandably, be never.
Edit:
Ohh and...
Originally posted by dar_es_balat
Originally posted by bstripp
Originally it was to mask spartan content so that people could not blow through it too quickly. The developers wanted you to prolong your subs. It wasn't immersion or any other romantic ideals. Simply a way to slow people down from finishing the limited things to do.
This is a bogus argument. Asheron's Call had long travel times. Why? Because it was a virtual world, with content all over the place. Ultima Online had long travel times. Why? In order to provide the player with random content, both from other players and monsters. Again it was a virtual world.
I think MMO's today have lost the entire virtual world concept which is relatively open ended and instead embraced the game scope concept where there is a start and a finish. Yes the genre is growing because of it, but I think what people are getting at here is that the genre is growing away from the concepts that originally made it appealing in the first place.
It is no longer virtual reality that is being sought by many games. This is what old farts like me who were around at the beginning wanted, and the next game to improve on the virtual reality aspect will be the game we play.
If I can never again have the similiar challenges that were once present in MMO's then, yes, totally.. I would gladly play a new MMO that at least embraced the idea of virtual world. Kudos.
The article sums up my discontent and disconnect with newer games pretty well. I don't mind games improving the new player experience with quests that teach the UI and aspects of crafting and such. Unfortunately, it might lead new players to believe (to their delight or dismay) that the entire game is quest based, leading to much crying and unsubbing when the truth is revealed.
Anarchy Online was my first MMO, and despite a community that needs fumigating, aging graphics, bugs that have always existed and I guess always will, and the burnout factor of just how many years I played that game, I find myself missing it more and more. And I'm sorry I missed early SWG, too. Sounds like I would have liked it, at least until they simplified it.
I suppose Darkfall or Mortal Online is the next logical step in my search for a no-mandatory-quests game, but I've read up on both, and in the case of Darkfall, the gankers will probably have me rage quitting in a week, and Mortal Online features gankers and bugs both. While I can probably get away with playing LOTRO without questing, coming from Fallen Earth, it felt like I was wandering around in an admittedly very beautiful kid's game. I didn't feel even remotely challenged. And Eve just starts off at too slow a pace for me, at least based on how I like to play an MMO, which is not to jump right in and start pvping, since I'm much more of a gatherer/crafter. I need a new game that's more like the old ones.
I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy, accompanied by an educational system which would be oriented toward social goals.
Your scoring system is a mess. The older games have the better worlds, gameplay, exploration, characters...
And the new games have better newbie areas and tutorials....something that takes about an hour of gametime....
and the new games win?
So...if a book has a great first chapter...and the rest of it sucks....it's the best book EVER.
Nice.
yeah.. thats the TLDR way.. :P
Besides I think the newbie experience argument is somewhat flawed.
Most new games start out holding your hand and never let go. I never liked that. It might be good for the mass appeal, but it gets on my nerves having to go through it all every time I wish to start a new character.
I especially detest getting massive amounts of xp for completing stupidly simple quests. Might be nice for the casuals that want to get to the end game.. Thats the usual argument atleast. But I've had so many more hours of enjoyment learning from other players I teamed up with, than I ever had from mostly soloquesting to max level.
All that hand holding shows its ugly side when you are forced to team up with other soloers later in the game. Its rare to find people with a minimum of ability in team work or with any sort of social skills cause that just wasnt needed till now. Plus with the crazy amount of xp from quests, you soon outlevel the encounters that you needed the group for.
That means that those people, that you finally turned into a proper group, move on to other things. Or you outlevel them while they are at work. leaving some to try and break in some other antisocial nitwits.
But atleast you can all go back to soloing the rest of the way to the end game... Oooops more grouping and raiding there.. but but but.. this is nothing like the rest of the game that we just played.. aaaw crap now we have to start sorting the weat from the chaff again and try to build a coherent group again. Hmm hang on did I even enjoy playing alone all that time. Was my experience any different from the others I will now join up with?..
Guess what Im trying to say is.. Screw games that are all tutorial + a few dungeons and perhaps a bit of pvp..
I'd rather stand in line for an hour to get in a grind group waiting for my 5 hours of grinding before I need sleep. only to log on again and see the same group is still active and welcomes me back.
And out with the modern button mashing and back with the chatty groups.. It is the comunity that keeps me playing and the pain of repeatedly mashing the same buttons every second that makes me stop.
A few things I have noted from "old school" to new.
The community is not what it was. By that the new generation of gamers seem ask what is in it for me?
I cannot count the number of time we camped Rage Fire (I think that was her name) for the priest epic drop. As a non=priest why did I spent countless nights waiting for that turd to spawn and drop the bit that was needed? Because my friends needed me there. It doesn't seem to me people will go out of their way to help people even guildies if there is nothing "in it" for them.
Makes me feel like the old man yelling at the kids to get of my lawn...
This is absolutely true... and it really is unfortunate that we have an era of players that are like this. I try to break the mold and be helpful even when it doesn't benefit me.
Recent example: (Similar situations have happened, but this is the most recent)
I'm leveling my Rogue in WoW, as alot of you know, there are a decent amount of group quests in Dragonblight, and being the empty barren that is General chat in each zone, breaking the silence; someone was asking for help for some of the group quests and no one was answering him. (I mean, at least say in general chat... no thanks or something, but people generally just ignore others). At the time, I didn't have any of the ones he needed help on, but I offered my services anyway, just to consciously take that one step in breaking this current mold that, probably 97% of the players in WoW (especially) have.
Needless to say, when I finally got these quests... it took me forever to get a group to finish them lol.
I think there are many well written points here, that are continually ignored during this sort of discussion. As already said, the bottom line is that there is a huge difference between a game and a virtual world, whether people want to admit that or not. A virtual world by its very definition will have more tedious things over a game, because the games usually gut those out and replace them with more 'heroic' action.
The first batch of games in this genre were different in many ways, but they were similar in that they were worlds that players wanted to live in. Today living in a world has been replaced with you being the hero of a game, and as a side bonus, there are hundreds of other heroes online with you. Simple as that.
The rose colored glasses argument is just dumb. For nostalgia to make sense, it would require that the games haven't changed much, other than graphics and bugs obviously. Then you could claim, yeah, you guys are just biased to your first game, things are better now. But the games HAVE changed, in a big way. Could it be that some people don't like the changes? Of course it is. It has nothing to do with your first game played.
I have no such problem in other genres, so why doesn't the argument hold true there. FPS, flight simulators and RTSs have not changed fundamentally at all. The graphics, flash and controls are all better and streamlined. The core of the game has remained, and I enjoy the new ones as much as the old ones, and in fact, really cannot get into the old games because they don't really measure up to the newer ones.
If I take my flight simulators, remove landing, take-offs, flying to objectives, simplify the radar, get rid of stalls and cornering speed management, make the action faster and add more missiles and bad guys to add to the action... well that's not a flight simulator, no matter how flashy the action looks. Its just an action game that looks like the flight simulator i used to play. Yet what i see, to continue the analogy, is people saying, "yeah but all the boring stuff is removed, the game is way better now, the action is way better, you just have nostalgia for your first game,". What???
Northing beats sandbox, i just do not understand why there is ONLY EVE TO PLAY if you want a great sandbox game...
Ultima Online was one of the first mmorpgs and nailed it, you had a huuuge world and you could just log in and live virtual life, own a house, be a adventurer, kill whoever you want etc etc etc. Nowadays everyone is super hero trying to save the world...
EVE gameplay in different setting - thats what im looking for in mmorpg... and im pretty sure im not alone in this.
Sorry I forgot to post the most unique and fun aspects of the classes.. Barbarians when they went berserk they kept pumping up hitting the berserk button were BERSERK! The person controlling the barbarian had to keep the clickng praying the barbarian did not land on a party member because they would ONE SHOT KILL the part members as they were so strong! Talk about unique game play! The idea was to go to the lair.. everyone wait outside the lair.. barbarian go off screen and pump up than run back onscreen and attempt to get in the lair before killing anyone.. as soon as barbarian went in everyone else jumped in and started casting on the barbarian and hoping that the boss monster kept it's agro on the barbarian because if it didn't than not only was the boss a threat the barb was a threat too! Until the barb could get back in control and get back to attacking the boss and not the party members! Now that is what a Barbarians Berserk is suppose to be BERSERK!
I think a lot of what the author is talking about has nothing to do with Old vs New.
What the author is talking about is 'first love'!!
I had dabbled in older MMO's like EQ, but because of a poor dial up connection it wasn't until Earth and Beyond, StarWars Galaxies and Phantasy Star Online (on Dreamcast) came along that I was really able to throw myself in to playing online and MMO games.
And for me SwG is the best MMO experience I have had. I joined the game very early in it's life, and the game felt big and intimidating. No one could ever say that SwG was a really great game - but for me it was just the best. Trekking in to the middle of nowhere, just to see if there was anything interesting was fantastic. Setting up a campsite and having a random player ask if they could sit, then chatting about the stuff we'd seen was cool.
In the early days the community was cool. The tutorials were not massively hand holding. Travel was slow. Crafting was phenomenal. It was justa fun playground despite it's numerous flaws - and I loved every minute of it.
If I take the two games I have the most experience with, being EQ1 an WoW, Though I have played just about every AAA MMORPG to date these are the two that I devoted the most years to. I have many great memories of both games, I really see very little lost from EQ1 to WoW. in fact in my opinion WoW is Far superior.
When reading through this thread the and many other similar threads, it surprises me how many look at these two games and say that WoW is terrible and EQ1 was awesome. when in reality WoW in my opinion is just a highly polished and refined evolution of EQ1 that introduces more options on how you enjoy it. I think the community and the players have changed far more negatively than the games have.
One of the most common complaints I hear and see, revolve around quests and hand holding, While I agree that the quest can hold your hand and guide you through a rather linear experience, the world does not. it is in fact a far more open and seamless world than EQ is. and the quests in WoW are 100% optional. you can level 1-80 without ever doing one. "but you get more experience and money and gear through questing" yes you do, who cares! you can still grind and explore and craft for gear. that is a primary difference between the player playing wow and the player playing EQ. wow gave you the option to level and be guided by quests and this was/is great for new players, But did not take away your option to play it the same as you played EQ. Only you did.
another common complaint is that WoW is just easy. again, in my opinion, you can find just as much challenge in wow, you can explore and fight beyond the area that quests say are "your level" and push the limits of your character and or group. "But this isn't the fastest way to level or get money and not where the quests tell me to go" that's correct, Who cares!.
you can explore(even more than you could in EQ), you can challenge yourself, you can customize your character(IMO more so than EQ)you can do everything you did in EQ and more while you play WoW, Because you didn't/don't is not a flaw in design it is a flaw in the player.
There is a reason i did not have a max level character in WoW until BC that has nothing to do with skill or time played, it had to do with making the choice to take my time to enjoy the world and my characters to the fullest reguardless of what options were presented. I did take the time to explore, I did take the time to challenge myself and push my character to the limit. I played multiple characters just to see how far I could push different classes at different levels.
If you just ran through quests in a rush to get to the endgame, the only one who lost was you. (unless of course that is all you care about but then you are likely not someone who likes EQ better)
So essentially what you are saying is that older MMO's are better games but newer ones are more easily accessible, and on that basis you award the higher final score to the latter? Just so i'm getting this right, easy access to poor content is more important/better than access to quality content that takes a little thinking?....
Just when I thought that awarding WAR 10/10 for Endgame content was the apex of stupidity, you have somehow managed to surpass yourself. Congratulations.
"Come and have a look at what you could have won."
So essentially what you are saying is that older MMO's are better games but newer ones are more easily accessible, and on that basis you award the higher final score to the latter? Just so i'm getting this right, easy access to poor content is more important/better than access to quality content that takes a little thinking?....
Just when I thought that awarding WAR 10/10 for Endgame content was the apex of stupidity, you have somehow managed to surpass yourself. Congratulations.
In my opinion the biggest problem with the comparison is that it is not specifying comparing apples to apples.
For example making a comparison of UO to WoW doesn't work because they're really completely different types of games
WoW is class/level /trinity type game which is better compared to a game like EQ which is the same type of game.
UO is a different beast , and I can't think of a modern equivalent ATM. (don't think any really exist, DF maybe?)
So essentially what you are saying is that older MMO's are better games but newer ones are more easily accessible, and on that basis you award the higher final score to the latter? Just so i'm getting this right, easy access to poor content is more important/better than access to quality content that takes a little thinking?....
Just when I thought that awarding WAR 10/10 for Endgame content was the apex of stupidity, you have somehow managed to surpass yourself. Congratulations.
In my opinion the biggest problem with the comparison is that it is not specifying comparing apples to apples.
For example making a comparison of UO to WoW doesn't work because they're really completely different types of games
WoW is class/level /trinity type game which is better compared to a game like EQ which is the same type of game.
UO is a different beast , and I can't think of a modern equivalent ATM. (don't think any really exist, DF maybe?)
Darkfall and EVE are the closest things to UO currently, but that's not really saying a great deal. Whilst I love both games they are not really comparable like for like with UO so i'd have to agree with you that there isn't really a modern equivalent of it.
I will say though that by mentioning the trinity system for example you are in away supporting the supposition that older games are better (which is certainly my point of view). The very fact that modern games are class/level/trinity based shows that they are (for want of a better word) worse then skill based games. But I am in partial agreement with your core supposition, perhaps he should have compared older mmos with the likes of EVE/DF instead of directly with WoW et al.
"Come and have a look at what you could have won."
So essentially what you are saying is that older MMO's are better games but newer ones are more easily accessible, and on that basis you award the higher final score to the latter? Just so i'm getting this right, easy access to poor content is more important/better than access to quality content that takes a little thinking?....
Just when I thought that awarding WAR 10/10 for Endgame content was the apex of stupidity, you have somehow managed to surpass yourself. Congratulations.
In my opinion the biggest problem with the comparison is that it is not specifying comparing apples to apples.
For example making a comparison of UO to WoW doesn't work because they're really completely different types of games
WoW is class/level /trinity type game which is better compared to a game like EQ which is the same type of game.
UO is a different beast , and I can't think of a modern equivalent ATM. (don't think any really exist, DF maybe?)
Darkfall and EVE are the closest things to UO currently, but that's not really saying a great deal. Whilst I love both games they are not really comparable like for like with UO so i'd have to agree with you that there isn't really a modern equivalent of it.
I will say though that by mentioning the trinity system for example you are in away supporting the supposition that older games are better (which is certainly my point of view). The very fact that modern games are class/level/trinity based shows that they are (for want of a better word) worse then skill based games. But I am in partial agreement with your core supposition, perhaps he should have compared older mmos with the likes of EVE/DF instead of directly with WoW et al.
The trinity system goes back to EQ1 in graphical MMORPG's and farther in muds and P&P, so is not something that in my opinion has gotten worse in new games. So by no means am I saying older is better when both old and new use the system.
I understand that you, and many other people don't like it but is not a new concept. more people would say it is an antiquated system I would guess.
When reading through this thread the and many other similar threads, it surprises me how many look at these two games and say that WoW is terrible and EQ1 was awesome. when in reality WoW in my opinion is just a highly polished and refined evolution of EQ1 that introduces more options on how you enjoy it. I think the community and the players have changed far more negatively than the games have.
Well Wow Beta and release were great, but then community fell apart, too many kids...
EQ1 never had that problem, it was mature...
Wow is better than EQ as a product, but community...
When reading through this thread the and many other similar threads, it surprises me how many look at these two games and say that WoW is terrible and EQ1 was awesome. when in reality WoW in my opinion is just a highly polished and refined evolution of EQ1 that introduces more options on how you enjoy it. I think the community and the players have changed far more negatively than the games have.
Well Wow Beta and release were great, but then community fell apart, too many kids...
EQ1 never had that problem, it was mature...
Wow is better than EQ as a product, but community...
I agree 100%
Edit: P.S. I think age only plays a small part in that. i am often amazed by how "adults" act in games.
If I take the two games I have the most experience with, being EQ1 an WoW, Though I have played just about every AAA MMORPG to date these are the two that I devoted the most years to. I have many great memories of both games, I really see very little lost from EQ1 to WoW. in fact in my opinion WoW is Far superior.
When reading through this thread the and many other similar threads, it surprises me how many look at these two games and say that WoW is terrible and EQ1 was awesome. when in reality WoW in my opinion (what does "in reality" mean when refering to your opinion.. The use of "in reality" is to imply it's fact that your opinion means something.. I agree.. You are allowed an opinion, but you should delete the "in reality" part.. is just a highly polished and refined evolution of EQ1 that introduces more options on how you enjoy it. I think the community and the players have changed far more negatively than the games have. (can you give us a list of all those things you think is refined.. I would like to compare your thoughts vs others.. It's hard to give credit to your opinion of refinement when you con't explain what you think is refined)
One of the most common complaints I hear and see, revolve around quests and hand holding, While I agree that the quest can hold your hand and guide you through a rather linear experience, the world does not. it is in fact a far more open and seamless world than EQ is. ( IN your opinion.. WoW is seamless, but having mobs in the zone lose agro after running 50 feet is LAME and carebear, IMO)and the quests in WoW are 100% optional. you can level 1-80 without ever doing one. "but you get more experience and money and gear through questing" yes you do, who cares! you can still grind and explore and craft for gear. that is a primary difference between the player playing wow and the player playing EQ. wow gave you the option to level and be guided by quests and this was/is great for new players, But did not take away your option to play it the same as you played EQ. Only you did. (agreed, WoW is great for hte casual linear quest option for new players to MMO, however, Where is the WoW option to group camping? Where are the trains in WoW? etc etc)
another common complaint is that WoW is just easy. again, in my opinion, you can find just as much challenge in wow, you can explore and fight beyond the area that quests say are "your level" and push the limits of your character and or group. "But this isn't the fastest way to level or get money and not where the quests tell me to go" that's correct, Who cares!. (obviously you never played the old original EQ where rooting, mezing, pulling, snaring, kiting mobs was indead almost required or expect a train in Crushbone, or Blackburrow, Splitpaw, KC, etc etc.. Now that was some fun shit.. CHOO CHOO) I find it funny as hell that WoW has the emote "train" from characters when it's impossible to have trains in the game.. LOL
you can explore(even more than you could in EQ),( in YOUR opinion) you can challenge yourself, you can customize your character(IMO more so than EQ) (Customize more in WoW.. are you serious?.. Really?.. I think you need to go check EQ1 AA system, plus much much more.. Especially the roles a player can fill in the game.. i.e. monks pulling, chanters mezing, druids snaring and kiting, etc etc) you can do everything you did in EQ and more while you play WoW, Because you didn't/don't is not a flaw in design it is a flaw in the player.Im sorry Im going to have to call "BS" on this whole thing that WoW has more options and versitality then EQ1
There is a reason i did not have a max level character in WoW until BC that has nothing to do with skill or time played, it had to do with making the choice to take my time to enjoy the world and my characters to the fullest reguardless of what options were presented. I did take the time to explore, I did take the time to challenge myself and push my character to the limit. I played multiple characters just to see how far I could push different classes at different levels.
If you just ran through quests in a rush to get to the endgame, the only one who lost was you. (unless of course that is all you care about but then you are likely not someone who likes EQ better)
Forcing yourself to play hard mode to challenge yourself is a rather silly excuse to WoW's carebear system.. That would be like me saying, 'OK, WoW is too easy, so from now on, play WoW with no mouse, and one hand tied behind your back to challenge yourself".. Why would one want to gimp themselves from normal gameplay.. I have to admit doing SM dungeon as a high level naked toon is fun the first time.. (shits and giggles), but I wouldn't do it again, no need to..
I see you along with many WoW fans that are always comparing games.. keep ignoring the raid mechanics of WoW, (which is 90% of their end game) and how restricting raids to 10 or 25 man limits is a PRO, moreso then a CON.. I fail to see any good from a players perspective, that restricting raids to certain classes and number, then add the ID system ontop of that.. Please do address that major part of the raid game, and WHY it's good..
The reason these arguments throw up so much more heat than light is the utter dishonesty of people on your side of the argument. There is so much complete BS in your post i don't know where to start.
"how many look at these two games and say that WoW is terrible and EQ1 was awesome"
Hardly anyone says that.
"when in reality WoW in my opinion is just a highly polished and refined evolution of EQ1"
The default mode of EQ was group-based. The default mode of WoW is solo-based. The default mode of play is completely different and that has consequences. Some of those consequences are liked by some people and disliked by others. It's not complicated. It's no different to one person preferring Chinese food and another preferring Pizza. For some reason the people who prefer the 1-80 in six seconds games won't accept that other people can have other preferences and like to pretend it's all nostalgia. If someone prefers Chinese food and used to have a great Chinese place nearby but it closed down and was replaced by Italian and they moan about it then it's not because of nostalgia. It's because they prefer Chinese to Italian.
"One of the most common complaints I hear and see, revolve around quests and hand holding, While I agree that the quest can hold your hand and guide you through a rather linear experience, the world does not."
Yes it does.
" it is in fact a far more open and seamless world than EQ is."
No it isn't. Mobs are the primary constraint on travel not zoning.
"and the quests in WoW are 100% optional. you can level 1-80 without ever doing one."
If a game takes 10,000 exp to level and each quest gives 1000 and each mob gives 1 then yes you can level without doing any quests if you kill 10,000 mobs. There are many things you *can* do in life. I could go on the roof and try to fly but the cost / benefit puts me off trying.
"you get more experience and money and gear through questing" yes you do, who cares!"
Everyone cares. It's human nature to work on cost / benefit. It's a question of how much. If a game doesn't want to push you along one tightly controlled path then they can set the cost / benefit gap between two types of behaviour quite low. Min / maxers will still take the optimal route if there's even a 5% differential but other people will wander off the path now and then. If a game wants everyone to follow one specified route then they set the cost / benefit gap very high.
"another common complaint is that WoW is just easy. again, in my opinion, you can find just as much challenge in wow"
The default difficulty level of a mass market solo-based quest-grinder *has* to be low for entirely obvious and logical reasons. It is entirely true that the "default" level of difficulty in those games is *much* lower than the old games. No doubt there are bits of the game specifically designed to be harder but that doesn't change the base reality.
"you can explore(even more than you could in EQ)"
Speaking as an EQ explorer type this is complete rubbish. I wouldn't know how to prove it but all my experience in all the newer games i've tried higher level mobs see through invis / stealth / camo much more consistently than in EQ because the games are designed to keep you in you place more. (They probably would have done it in EQ too if they'd thought of it but they didn't.)
"you can challenge yourself"
If you fight the game design. In the older games people developed strategies to reduce the default difficulty that was designed in because it was set a bit too high for the average player now you have to deliberately gimp yourself to make it harder and even then it doesn't make it harder just slower.
Lastly, once again. It's not about WoW or any other of the newer games being bad games. In a lot of technical ways they are much better. As games they are no doubt much better to *for some types of people*. However they are not better for other types of people. This is not complicated.
(what does "in reality" mean when refering to your opinion.. The use of "in reality" is to imply it's fact that your opinion means something.. I agree.. You are allowed an opinion, but you should delete the "in reality" part.. This is just nitpicking my choice of words meh.
(can you give us a list of all those things you think is refined.. I would like to compare your thoughts vs others.. It's hard to give credit to your opinion of refinement when you con't explain what you think is refined)almost everything in my opinion is refined/improved it would be a rather long list to go over every feature of both games so was omitted as this was/is already a rather long post.
( IN your opinion.. WoW is seamless, but having mobs in the zone lose agro after running 50 feet is LAME and carebear, IMO) A zone line in EQ is a seam, and having a mob get tired of chasing you and giving up is an improvement to hitting an invisible wall where the mobs suddenly disappears, in addition to being able to skirt around the edge of a zone where no mobs existed/went. Where as in Wow it would be more dangerous to attempt this through most of the world.
(agreed, WoW is great for hte casual linear quest option for new players to MMO, however, Where is the WoW option to group camping? Where are the trains in WoW? etc etc) The need to camp was fixed in WoW you no longer need to head out into the world and do a camp check (aka commons goblin camp one taken etc..) that again does not prevent you from sitting at a particular spawn and endlessly kill it. again trains are fixed by eliminating zone lines for the most part.
(obviously you never played the old original EQ where rooting, mezing, pulling, snaring, kiting mobs was indead almost required or expect a train in Crushbone, or Blackburrow, Splitpaw, KC, etc etc.. Now that was some fun shit.. CHOO CHOO) I find it funny as hell that WoW has the emote "train" from characters when it's impossible to have trains in the game.. LOL I did indead play EQ1 from launch, While it was exciting when trains happened it was also a great tool for griefing. and of great frustration for many people.
you can explore(even more than you could in EQ),( in YOUR opinion) adding flight paths / faster travel does not take away your abailty to explore (hmm, at least at the times I played, with all expansions EQ could be larger I guess you are right I dont really know.)
(Customize more in WoW.. are you serious?.. Really?.. I think you need to go check EQ1 AA system, plus much much more.. Especially the roles a player can fill in the game.. i.e. monks pulling, chanters mezing, druids snaring and kiting, etc etc) ok Lets take paladin as an example in EQ you can off tank and off heal, but reguardles of how you spend your points on stats a Paladin is a paladin with very little variationin to what you can do, I agree that this does get better with AA but not alot a paladin is still a paladin. (obviously you never played old origonal EQ pre AA) In WoW you can spend your talents in three trees thus providing three very distinct types of paladins. This holds true for all classes.
as for the rest, there are many forms of croud control in WoW that can be performed by many different classes. (hunter pulling/ Ice trap/cuncussion shot, mage sheeping/ even War hamstring different skills on different classes similar affects) ( I will agreee that these have become less necessary post BC)
you can do everything you did in EQ and more while you play WoW, Because you didn't/don't is not a flaw in design it is a flaw in the player.Im sorry Im going to have to call "BS" on this whole thing that WoW has more options and versitality then EQ1
Forcing yourself to play hard mode to challenge yourself is a rather silly excuse to WoW's carebear system.. That would be like me saying, 'OK, WoW is too easy, so from now on, play WoW with no mouse, and one hand tied behind your back to challenge yourself".. Why would one want to gimp themselves from normal gameplay.. (but acording to you normal gamplay is killing mobs with no purpose other than gaining exp. therefore not doing the quests would be normal gameplay ) I have to admit doing SM dungeon as a high level naked toon is fun the first time.. (shits and giggles), but I wouldn't do it again, no need to.. The flaw here is not in one being carebear, the only thing "harder" in EQ was the need to grind for experience with no other options on how to progress.(thats not hard just time consuming) again you could increase the challenge by fighting yellow cons vs. blue or gren cons, WoW gives you other options for gaining experience without taking that away.
so to make sure I understand, because the option does not exist in EQ, it is good, because it does exist in WoW it is bad, and you feal you Have to do it. so rather than more options you feal there should be less options? I'm really not sure I understand this thinking. is it so you can get to max level through the one and only method thus feal superior to those who are not there yet? I don't get it.
But I suppose most humans will take the path of least resistance and instant gratification, and then complain that it was too easy.
I see you along with many WoW fans that are always comparing games.. keep ignoring the raid mechanics of WoW, (which is 90% of their end game) and how restricting raids to 10 or 25 man limits is a PRO, moreso then a CON.. I fail to see any good from a players perspective, that restricting raids to certain classes and number, The only restrictions to the classes (outside of player created restrictions) is dictated by the Trinity, same as EQ. restricting the number of players actually adds to challenge, If you can bring as many as you want then you just overpower everything where is the challenge in that? (that said, I dont care for raiding) in fact I dont like the end game premise at all in either EQ or WoW
then add the ID system ontop of that.. (are you refering to "real ID" if so this is an optional feature that that has nothing to do with gameplay. and for most players has nothing to do with anything) if something else let me know, I dont know what this is.
Please do address that major part of the raid game, and WHY it's good.. Again in my opionion niether are good.
When reading through this thread the and many other similar threads, it surprises me how many look at these two games and say that WoW is terrible and EQ1 was awesome. when in reality WoW in my opinion is just a highly polished and refined evolution of EQ1 that introduces more options on how you enjoy it. I think the community and the players have changed far more negatively than the games have.
Well Wow Beta and release were great, but then community fell apart, too many kids...
EQ1 never had that problem, it was mature...
Wow is better than EQ as a product, but community...
All I'm going to say to the bolded statement is 'lol' because you must not have played EQ a whole lot. All you had to do was hang out at EC tunnel for 15 minutes to find how 'mature' the EQ community was. All you had to do was hang out in Oasis and watch people train sand giants to the docks to see how 'mature' the EQ community was. I could go on and on.
If you want to say the EQ community was more cohesive due to the fact the gameplay forced you to be like that, then I'd agree, but I don't think maturity had anything to do with it.
When reading through this thread the and many other similar threads, it surprises me how many look at these two games and say that WoW is terrible and EQ1 was awesome. when in reality WoW in my opinion is just a highly polished and refined evolution of EQ1 that introduces more options on how you enjoy it. I think the community and the players have changed far more negatively than the games have.
Well Wow Beta and release were great, but then community fell apart, too many kids...
EQ1 never had that problem, it was mature...
Wow is better than EQ as a product, but community...
All I'm going to say to the bolded statement is 'lol' because you must not have played EQ a whole lot. All you had to do was hang out at EC tunnel for 15 minutes to find how 'mature' the EQ community was. All you had to do was hang out in Oasis and watch people train sand giants to the docks to see how 'mature' the EQ community was. I could go on and on.
If you want to say the EQ community was more cohesive due to the fact the gameplay forced you to be like that, then I'd agree, but I don't think maturity had anything to do with it.
WOW is definately a more polished and refined version of EQ1 with some things spattered in from some other MMOs of the time.
I do believe the challenges of EQ1 did bring the community together. I recall, as well as the writer, clearing my Saturday for a Qeynos to Freeport (or the other way around ) run. I had a higher level bard that would get paid to lead people from one city to another. We actually had like a little merc band that would play escort to people wanting to or needing to visit those cities.
It was almost a requirement to have these "scouts" play escort or entire groups would spend the day doing corspe runs. People banded together for this and were forced to play nice. Those that didn't were crazy rogue outsiders.
To the other point, I also recall the immature jerks leading trains right to you for the fun of it and the chat box would fill up wirth people shouting "Train" all the time, especailly in Dungeons. Still, overall, my experience with other players was better compared to today's player community.
The reason these arguments throw up so much more heat than light is the utter dishonesty of people on your side of the argument. There is so much complete BS in your post i don't know where to start.
Hmm, thats funny in a topic that can be nothing but opinion I shold have prefaced my entire post by stating that this is my opinion, although nothing said in this thread can be anything but opinion. even with that I tried to state throughout that it was my opinion. Nothing I stated was dishonest. There is so much BS in you responses I will start at the begining but as with most people on your side of the fence you contradict the person before you so this could be a bit dificult.
Hardly anyone says that. i suppose you could be right, it may just be my experience, it could be just a few very vocal people across many threads that I just happend apon and across many boards I have been to
The default mode of EQ was group-based. The default mode of WoW is solo-based. The default mode of play is completely different and that has consequences. Some of those consequences are liked by some people and disliked by others. It's not complicated. It's no different to one person preferring Chinese food and another preferring Pizza. For some reason the people who prefer the 1-80 in six seconds games won't accept that other people can have other preferences and like to pretend it's all nostalgia. If someone prefers Chinese food and used to have a great Chinese place nearby but it closed down and was replaced by Italian and they moan about it then it's not because of nostalgia. It's because they prefer Chinese to Italian.
ok just to be clear, I did play both games for a very long time, I played them both from launch, I played EQ for about 4 years and played WoW until just a little before WoTLK. I guess I should have stated that in the begining as that shows the timeline of when my play experience was, in both cases mostly in the early experience. I loved both of these game durring the times that I played them but of course I will always have a soft spot for EQ as nothing can bring that fealing of awe back that I got my first time in a 3D world.
That said Vanilla wow was not really solo friendly some classes were a bit easier to solo than others but really the hunter was the solo option in the begining by design. much like a druid was great for soloing in EQ (by accident with kiting) they did over time make soloing easier for other classes in WoW which in the long run did have an affect on the community. but then in the begining you had to grind out your last ten or so levels to 60 with no other options
"One of the most common complaints I hear and see, revolve around quests and hand holding, While I agree that the quest can hold your hand and guide you through a rather linear experience, the world does not."
Yes it does.
" it is in fact a far more open and seamless world than EQ is."
No it isn't. Mobs are the primary constraint on travel not zoning.
While I agree that mobs add challenge to traveling and exploring they in no way prevent it. I have taken a level 10 from booty bay to the undercity, and in EQ I took a level 5 from Kelethin to Qeynos, three deaths in the WoW run and 4 deaths in the EQ run.
If a game takes 10,000 exp to level and each quest gives 1000 and each mob gives 1 then yes you can level without doing any quests if you kill 10,000 mobs. There are many things you *can* do in life. I could go on the roof and try to fly but the cost / benefit puts me off trying.
Sure, you can also with very little effort find a balance that fits your play style.
Everyone cares. It's human nature to work on cost / benefit. It's a question of how much. If a game doesn't want to push you along one tightly controlled path then they can set the cost / benefit gap between two types of behaviour quite low. Min / maxers will still take the optimal route if there's even a 5% differential but other people will wander off the path now and then. If a game wants everyone to follow one specified route then they set the cost / benefit gap very high.
so again it is the player in your opinion needs his options limited on how to progress because beople are not capable of making the choice to not take the path of least resistance. without the mechanics forcing them to just grind on mobs they won't? yet they will turn around an complain that it was too easy. I guess i just give people too much credit. I assumed that anyone could choose how they play and could control themselves enough that when given the option they could find the balance that would be most gratifying to them.
The default difficulty level of a mass market solo-based quest-grinder *has* to be low for entirely obvious and logical reasons. It is entirely true that the "default" level of difficulty in those games is *much* lower than the old games. No doubt there are bits of the game specifically designed to be harder but that doesn't change the base reality.
again I disagree, the dificulty difference was in EXP gain through questing that EQ lacked (oh and hell levels which were an error) in the beging of wow the leveling curve was not really not that much different from EQ until you factored in the exp gain from quests. This though was more about time than dificulty I solod my warior in EQ fighting mostly even and blue cons with minimal dificulty, aften went to yellow mobs just for fun, same in WoW. again I ascert my opinion that more options is better than more restrictions and you can mix how much you quest how much you grind and that intelegent humans can play how it is most enjoyable and gratifying reguardless of the easiest way. but if you do take the fastest and easiest way (again for redundancy sake, in my opinion) you can only blame yourself if you aren't gratified in the end.
Speaking as an EQ explorer type this is complete rubbish. I wouldn't know how to prove it but all my experience in all the newer games i've tried higher level mobs see through invis / stealth / camo much more consistently than in EQ because the games are designed to keep you in you place more. (They probably would have done it in EQ too if they'd thought of it but they didn't.)
I am an EQ explorer type also and a WoW explorer. I mostly played a war and a druid in EQ so stealth/invis was never an option.
"you can challenge yourself"
If you fight the game design. In the older games people developed strategies to reduce the default difficulty that was designed in because it was set a bit too high for the average player now you have to deliberately gimp yourself to make it harder and even then it doesn't make it harder just slower.
again, in my opinion it is not fighting the design it is just finding a balance.
Lastly, once again. It's not about WoW or any other of the newer games being bad games. In a lot of technical ways they are much better. As games they are no doubt much better to *for some types of people*. However they are not better for other types of people. This is not complicated.
Comments
My god these comparisions are stupid.
I have no interest in debating the points or trying to compare new vs old MMOs. I enjoyed the older games. I believe they presented more of a challenge and were more rewarding for the successes you attained in them because of those challenges. You weren't hand held through everything so the community, besides being more mature to begin with, was formed through the games unforgiving world. This was true of UO, EQ, and DaoC (Realm Pride ftw) and to some extent AC.
So my only topic of interest in this is community.
The community has degraded over time because the access to these games has opened up so liberally to attract all age groups and mental states (for lack of a better word). So MMO's, like games in general have become easier and more user friendly. Elements that were seen to be too hard or over the top have been revamped over and over again, game after game which has ushered in the new age of MMO's. A new age who'se motto is one of no douchebag left behind.
I don't begrudge gaming companies this. They are out to make a profit and making a game appeal first and foremost to the lowest common denominator is a way to make money. The MMO market has expanded so remarkably in the last decade which I believe is due to far more than the aforementioned but that is a debate for another time.
I see this attitude to openness a mistake a reason that games flare up brightly these days and then wane out of existence but that is just my, rather unpopular opinion. Anyway, you will not see communities revert back to what they were until games do the same.
Which will, understandably, be never.
Edit:
Ohh and...
If I can never again have the similiar challenges that were once present in MMO's then, yes, totally.. I would gladly play a new MMO that at least embraced the idea of virtual world. Kudos.
The article sums up my discontent and disconnect with newer games pretty well. I don't mind games improving the new player experience with quests that teach the UI and aspects of crafting and such. Unfortunately, it might lead new players to believe (to their delight or dismay) that the entire game is quest based, leading to much crying and unsubbing when the truth is revealed.
Anarchy Online was my first MMO, and despite a community that needs fumigating, aging graphics, bugs that have always existed and I guess always will, and the burnout factor of just how many years I played that game, I find myself missing it more and more. And I'm sorry I missed early SWG, too. Sounds like I would have liked it, at least until they simplified it.
I suppose Darkfall or Mortal Online is the next logical step in my search for a no-mandatory-quests game, but I've read up on both, and in the case of Darkfall, the gankers will probably have me rage quitting in a week, and Mortal Online features gankers and bugs both. While I can probably get away with playing LOTRO without questing, coming from Fallen Earth, it felt like I was wandering around in an admittedly very beautiful kid's game. I didn't feel even remotely challenged. And Eve just starts off at too slow a pace for me, at least based on how I like to play an MMO, which is not to jump right in and start pvping, since I'm much more of a gatherer/crafter. I need a new game that's more like the old ones.
I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy, accompanied by an educational system which would be oriented toward social goals.
~Albert Einstein
Your scoring system is a mess. The older games have the better worlds, gameplay, exploration, characters...
And the new games have better newbie areas and tutorials....something that takes about an hour of gametime....
and the new games win?
So...if a book has a great first chapter...and the rest of it sucks....it's the best book EVER.
Nice.
yeah.. thats the TLDR way.. :P
Besides I think the newbie experience argument is somewhat flawed.
Most new games start out holding your hand and never let go. I never liked that. It might be good for the mass appeal, but it gets on my nerves having to go through it all every time I wish to start a new character.
I especially detest getting massive amounts of xp for completing stupidly simple quests. Might be nice for the casuals that want to get to the end game.. Thats the usual argument atleast. But I've had so many more hours of enjoyment learning from other players I teamed up with, than I ever had from mostly soloquesting to max level.
All that hand holding shows its ugly side when you are forced to team up with other soloers later in the game. Its rare to find people with a minimum of ability in team work or with any sort of social skills cause that just wasnt needed till now. Plus with the crazy amount of xp from quests, you soon outlevel the encounters that you needed the group for.
That means that those people, that you finally turned into a proper group, move on to other things. Or you outlevel them while they are at work. leaving some to try and break in some other antisocial nitwits.
But atleast you can all go back to soloing the rest of the way to the end game... Oooops more grouping and raiding there.. but but but.. this is nothing like the rest of the game that we just played.. aaaw crap now we have to start sorting the weat from the chaff again and try to build a coherent group again. Hmm hang on did I even enjoy playing alone all that time. Was my experience any different from the others I will now join up with?..
Guess what Im trying to say is.. Screw games that are all tutorial + a few dungeons and perhaps a bit of pvp..
I'd rather stand in line for an hour to get in a grind group waiting for my 5 hours of grinding before I need sleep. only to log on again and see the same group is still active and welcomes me back.
And out with the modern button mashing and back with the chatty groups.. It is the comunity that keeps me playing and the pain of repeatedly mashing the same buttons every second that makes me stop.
This is absolutely true... and it really is unfortunate that we have an era of players that are like this. I try to break the mold and be helpful even when it doesn't benefit me.
Recent example: (Similar situations have happened, but this is the most recent)
I'm leveling my Rogue in WoW, as alot of you know, there are a decent amount of group quests in Dragonblight, and being the empty barren that is General chat in each zone, breaking the silence; someone was asking for help for some of the group quests and no one was answering him. (I mean, at least say in general chat... no thanks or something, but people generally just ignore others). At the time, I didn't have any of the ones he needed help on, but I offered my services anyway, just to consciously take that one step in breaking this current mold that, probably 97% of the players in WoW (especially) have.
Needless to say, when I finally got these quests... it took me forever to get a group to finish them lol.
I like the ideea of the column. I'll keep an eye out for it.
Love this.
Northing beats sandbox, i just do not understand why there is ONLY EVE TO PLAY if you want a great sandbox game...
Ultima Online was one of the first mmorpgs and nailed it, you had a huuuge world and you could just log in and live virtual life, own a house, be a adventurer, kill whoever you want etc etc etc. Nowadays everyone is super hero trying to save the world...
EVE gameplay in different setting - thats what im looking for in mmorpg... and im pretty sure im not alone in this.
Old-school wins hands down.
That sounds fun as hell.
I think a lot of what the author is talking about has nothing to do with Old vs New.
What the author is talking about is 'first love'!!
I had dabbled in older MMO's like EQ, but because of a poor dial up connection it wasn't until Earth and Beyond, StarWars Galaxies and Phantasy Star Online (on Dreamcast) came along that I was really able to throw myself in to playing online and MMO games.
And for me SwG is the best MMO experience I have had. I joined the game very early in it's life, and the game felt big and intimidating. No one could ever say that SwG was a really great game - but for me it was just the best. Trekking in to the middle of nowhere, just to see if there was anything interesting was fantastic. Setting up a campsite and having a random player ask if they could sit, then chatting about the stuff we'd seen was cool.
In the early days the community was cool. The tutorials were not massively hand holding. Travel was slow. Crafting was phenomenal. It was justa fun playground despite it's numerous flaws - and I loved every minute of it.
If I take the two games I have the most experience with, being EQ1 an WoW, Though I have played just about every AAA MMORPG to date these are the two that I devoted the most years to. I have many great memories of both games, I really see very little lost from EQ1 to WoW. in fact in my opinion WoW is Far superior.
When reading through this thread the and many other similar threads, it surprises me how many look at these two games and say that WoW is terrible and EQ1 was awesome. when in reality WoW in my opinion is just a highly polished and refined evolution of EQ1 that introduces more options on how you enjoy it. I think the community and the players have changed far more negatively than the games have.
One of the most common complaints I hear and see, revolve around quests and hand holding, While I agree that the quest can hold your hand and guide you through a rather linear experience, the world does not. it is in fact a far more open and seamless world than EQ is. and the quests in WoW are 100% optional. you can level 1-80 without ever doing one. "but you get more experience and money and gear through questing" yes you do, who cares! you can still grind and explore and craft for gear. that is a primary difference between the player playing wow and the player playing EQ. wow gave you the option to level and be guided by quests and this was/is great for new players, But did not take away your option to play it the same as you played EQ. Only you did.
another common complaint is that WoW is just easy. again, in my opinion, you can find just as much challenge in wow, you can explore and fight beyond the area that quests say are "your level" and push the limits of your character and or group. "But this isn't the fastest way to level or get money and not where the quests tell me to go" that's correct, Who cares!.
you can explore(even more than you could in EQ), you can challenge yourself, you can customize your character(IMO more so than EQ)you can do everything you did in EQ and more while you play WoW, Because you didn't/don't is not a flaw in design it is a flaw in the player.
There is a reason i did not have a max level character in WoW until BC that has nothing to do with skill or time played, it had to do with making the choice to take my time to enjoy the world and my characters to the fullest reguardless of what options were presented. I did take the time to explore, I did take the time to challenge myself and push my character to the limit. I played multiple characters just to see how far I could push different classes at different levels.
If you just ran through quests in a rush to get to the endgame, the only one who lost was you. (unless of course that is all you care about but then you are likely not someone who likes EQ better)
So essentially what you are saying is that older MMO's are better games but newer ones are more easily accessible, and on that basis you award the higher final score to the latter? Just so i'm getting this right, easy access to poor content is more important/better than access to quality content that takes a little thinking?....
Just when I thought that awarding WAR 10/10 for Endgame content was the apex of stupidity, you have somehow managed to surpass yourself. Congratulations.
"Come and have a look at what you could have won."
In my opinion the biggest problem with the comparison is that it is not specifying comparing apples to apples.
For example making a comparison of UO to WoW doesn't work because they're really completely different types of games
WoW is class/level /trinity type game which is better compared to a game like EQ which is the same type of game.
UO is a different beast , and I can't think of a modern equivalent ATM. (don't think any really exist, DF maybe?)
I don't think it's so much about new MMOs vs old MMOs but instead, good games vs bad games.
Darkfall and EVE are the closest things to UO currently, but that's not really saying a great deal. Whilst I love both games they are not really comparable like for like with UO so i'd have to agree with you that there isn't really a modern equivalent of it.
I will say though that by mentioning the trinity system for example you are in away supporting the supposition that older games are better (which is certainly my point of view). The very fact that modern games are class/level/trinity based shows that they are (for want of a better word) worse then skill based games. But I am in partial agreement with your core supposition, perhaps he should have compared older mmos with the likes of EVE/DF instead of directly with WoW et al.
"Come and have a look at what you could have won."
The trinity system goes back to EQ1 in graphical MMORPG's and farther in muds and P&P, so is not something that in my opinion has gotten worse in new games. So by no means am I saying older is better when both old and new use the system.
I understand that you, and many other people don't like it but is not a new concept. more people would say it is an antiquated system I would guess.
Well Wow Beta and release were great, but then community fell apart, too many kids...
EQ1 never had that problem, it was mature...
Wow is better than EQ as a product, but community...
I agree 100%
Edit: P.S. I think age only plays a small part in that. i am often amazed by how "adults" act in games.
@Aruvia
The reason these arguments throw up so much more heat than light is the utter dishonesty of people on your side of the argument. There is so much complete BS in your post i don't know where to start.
"how many look at these two games and say that WoW is terrible and EQ1 was awesome"
Hardly anyone says that.
"when in reality WoW in my opinion is just a highly polished and refined evolution of EQ1"
The default mode of EQ was group-based. The default mode of WoW is solo-based. The default mode of play is completely different and that has consequences. Some of those consequences are liked by some people and disliked by others. It's not complicated. It's no different to one person preferring Chinese food and another preferring Pizza. For some reason the people who prefer the 1-80 in six seconds games won't accept that other people can have other preferences and like to pretend it's all nostalgia. If someone prefers Chinese food and used to have a great Chinese place nearby but it closed down and was replaced by Italian and they moan about it then it's not because of nostalgia. It's because they prefer Chinese to Italian.
"One of the most common complaints I hear and see, revolve around quests and hand holding, While I agree that the quest can hold your hand and guide you through a rather linear experience, the world does not."
Yes it does.
" it is in fact a far more open and seamless world than EQ is."
No it isn't. Mobs are the primary constraint on travel not zoning.
"and the quests in WoW are 100% optional. you can level 1-80 without ever doing one."
If a game takes 10,000 exp to level and each quest gives 1000 and each mob gives 1 then yes you can level without doing any quests if you kill 10,000 mobs. There are many things you *can* do in life. I could go on the roof and try to fly but the cost / benefit puts me off trying.
"you get more experience and money and gear through questing" yes you do, who cares!"
Everyone cares. It's human nature to work on cost / benefit. It's a question of how much. If a game doesn't want to push you along one tightly controlled path then they can set the cost / benefit gap between two types of behaviour quite low. Min / maxers will still take the optimal route if there's even a 5% differential but other people will wander off the path now and then. If a game wants everyone to follow one specified route then they set the cost / benefit gap very high.
"another common complaint is that WoW is just easy. again, in my opinion, you can find just as much challenge in wow"
The default difficulty level of a mass market solo-based quest-grinder *has* to be low for entirely obvious and logical reasons. It is entirely true that the "default" level of difficulty in those games is *much* lower than the old games. No doubt there are bits of the game specifically designed to be harder but that doesn't change the base reality.
"you can explore(even more than you could in EQ)"
Speaking as an EQ explorer type this is complete rubbish. I wouldn't know how to prove it but all my experience in all the newer games i've tried higher level mobs see through invis / stealth / camo much more consistently than in EQ because the games are designed to keep you in you place more. (They probably would have done it in EQ too if they'd thought of it but they didn't.)
"you can challenge yourself"
If you fight the game design. In the older games people developed strategies to reduce the default difficulty that was designed in because it was set a bit too high for the average player now you have to deliberately gimp yourself to make it harder and even then it doesn't make it harder just slower.
Lastly, once again. It's not about WoW or any other of the newer games being bad games. In a lot of technical ways they are much better. As games they are no doubt much better to *for some types of people*. However they are not better for other types of people. This is not complicated.
All I'm going to say to the bolded statement is 'lol' because you must not have played EQ a whole lot. All you had to do was hang out at EC tunnel for 15 minutes to find how 'mature' the EQ community was. All you had to do was hang out in Oasis and watch people train sand giants to the docks to see how 'mature' the EQ community was. I could go on and on.
If you want to say the EQ community was more cohesive due to the fact the gameplay forced you to be like that, then I'd agree, but I don't think maturity had anything to do with it.
Hit of nostalgia...
WOW is definately a more polished and refined version of EQ1 with some things spattered in from some other MMOs of the time.
I do believe the challenges of EQ1 did bring the community together. I recall, as well as the writer, clearing my Saturday for a Qeynos to Freeport (or the other way around ) run. I had a higher level bard that would get paid to lead people from one city to another. We actually had like a little merc band that would play escort to people wanting to or needing to visit those cities.
It was almost a requirement to have these "scouts" play escort or entire groups would spend the day doing corspe runs. People banded together for this and were forced to play nice. Those that didn't were crazy rogue outsiders.
To the other point, I also recall the immature jerks leading trains right to you for the fun of it and the chat box would fill up wirth people shouting "Train" all the time, especailly in Dungeons. Still, overall, my experience with other players was better compared to today's player community.